The day of the same-sex marriage is still on its way

[FreeState]

Excellent editorial out of New Hampshire

http://www.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091108/OPINION/911080316/-1/NEWSMAP

The day of the same-sex marriage is still on its way
Opinion
November 08, 2009 2:00 AM

Those who voted down the Maine law permitting same-sex marriage on Tuesday say they did so to preserve the institution of marriage. The sad reality is that they have actually made their sacred institution weaker, not stronger.

My dream marriage to my fantasy girl wouldn't have suffered a millisecond of damage if Question 1 had been rejected. But today it feels tainted because we know what we have — and what we too often take for granted — is being denied to people every bit as valued and worthy as we would like to think we are.

Frankly, I'm kind of disgusted that other people have the legal authority — if not the moral superiority — to dictate who may marry whom. I don't need the approval of a busybody neighbor to marry the cute chick across the street. No one else should either.

There were many thousands who voted to repeal the gay marriage law because of deeply held beliefs. You have to respect that. And there are a few people who simply voted out of hate. There's not much you can do about that.

...snip... (go read this part -its worth it!)

The total wasn't enough this time around, but it's safe to say support for gay couples is evolving. We cast our ballots Tuesday because at this late date in history it's ridiculous to stand by in the midst of such blatant discrimination. This is an issue of equality, pure and simple.

I might get in trouble for saying this, but I can't quell this feeling there may be some who don't perceive homosexuals as their equals. Maybe it stems from this notion that certain people feel they have a right to decide whether fellow citizens are worthy of marriage. Well, if there's any confusion, I'd like to take this moment to clarify:

Being straight does not make you superior. Being self-righteous does not make you right. And the citizens you are trying to nudge into a darkened corner will not be silenced tonight or any other night.

[FlyingSquirrel]

1. And once it's achieved

you still won't be able to afford to cover your spouse.

That's my opinion, you'll get your rights before we get any fucking progress on healthcare reform.

Why? Because your rights don't cost the corporations anything.

:grr:

Sorry, I'm especially pissed today, seem to be relating EVERYTHING to healthcare.

[Roosesvelte]

2. Civil Unions For All Would Pass

Fighting over the use of a word delays the process. This is a self-inflicted wound.

[Toasterlad]

3. First of All, Civil Unions For All Would NOT Pass.

Those people who voted against marriage for gay people are not going to vote to have their own marriages replaced with civil unions. To believe otherwise is asinine.

Second of all, changing the state of marriage in any way due to religious bigotry is not equality.

It's not a word. It's equality.

[David Zephyr]

10. Civil Unions are being accepted at some state levels. You are right that it is not equality.

I'm not sure that civil unions, even with the Democrats in control of both houses and the White House would pass. I suspect that you are right here, but I don't know.

As we push for full equality, though, let's not diminish the rights we have already obtained in our patchwork toward equality: there are states that permit gay marriage, gay adoption, civil unions, domestic partnership laws, insurance benefits and more.

It's a checkerboard and I'm with you and admire your passion and commitment, but keep in mind that, as we move there, we are making progress, too, and that we have heroes all along our historical journey.

Sadly, as many here have noted (I think including you, Toasterlad), this is becoming more and more a generational issue with time squarely now on our side as all polling shows.

The barriers to full equality are coming down, maybe not all at once, but step back and look at that wall where so many bricks have already been removed and take heart.

We are getting there. And you are helping make it happen. :hi:

[Toasterlad]

15. I Am Happy For Gay Couples In States Like Washington Who Have Some Protection.

However, I won't be satisfied until we have full equality. Obviously, civil unions for gays/marriage for straights is not equality. Any reasonable person can see that. The problem is the people who advance this "civil unions for all" crap, which sounds reasonable and equal, but which has much less chance of being accepted by society than same-sex marriage does, and which will never be true equality.

Any advancement in civil rights is good, but civil unions tend to make people - gay and straight alike - complacent, which is dangerous.

Thanks for the kind words. :hi:

[mitchtv]

4. wrong

once a week this theory gets knocked down, actually it would be harder to replace Marriage, And Gays would be blamed for destroying it.

[Roosesvelte]

5. I Believe Otherwise

And if the same tactics fail again and again, why not try something new in one state?

[mitchtv]

8. I'll take equality

Thanks anyway.

[Roosesvelte]

11. It Is Equality

Nothing more, nothing less.

[mitchtv]

13. cept, it won't happen

ever

[mitchtv]

17. strait America will never give up marriage

The backlash would be deadly. "Gays killed marriage" would be the refrain

[TommyO]

6. Civil Unions are not equal to marriage, that much has been proven in NJ

http://www.state.nj.us/lps/dcr/downloads/CURC-Final-Report-.pdf

We, the thirteen members of the New Jersey Civil Union Review Commission, unanimously issue this final report, containing a set of recommendations to the Governor and the Legislature of the State of New Jersey. After eighteen public meetings, 26 hours of oral testimony and hundreds of pages of written submission from more than 150 witnesses, this Commission finds that the separate categorization established by the Civil Union Act invites and encourages unequal treatment of same-sex couples and their children. In a number of cases, the negative effect of the Civil Union Act on the physical and mental health of same-sex couples and their children is striking, largely because a number of employers and hospitals do not recognize the rights and benefits of marriage for civil union couples.

Straight people aren't going to give up marriage, why should gay people settle for less?

[PVnRT]

7. If you call everything a civil union, the bigots will simply

create some other subtier for gays to use. It really is all or nothing.

[Roosesvelte]

12. Civil Unions For All Gets Us Closer

There where always be bigots, just as we have racial bigots now. But what we would have, is equality under the law. That counts for a lot.

[Toasterlad]

14. And Marriage For All Gets Us THERE.

What's your point?

[Roosesvelte]

16. So Does Civil Unions For ALL

And that is a fight that is winnable now.

[mitchtv]

18. Impossibility

more than winnable. You're dreaming

[Roosesvelte]

19. Let Me Suggest You Do Your Own Research

Enough of the people who keep voting to deny equal rights on these ballot initiatives, are fine with the concept. Don't take my word for it, do your own personal polling.

[FreeState]

20. So you read the Dutch study were even there they choose Marriage over Civil Unions?

http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/09/how-the-dutch-work-same-sex-marriage/

Q: Did legalizing same-sex marriage face the same objections there as here?

A: The Dutch gay activists worked on the issue for about 15 years, so things clearly moved faster there. (We’re already past 15 years of serious effort here in the U.S.) A majority of their public supported equal rights for same-sex partners and marriage rights fairly early in that process. The most powerful opponents were in the Christian Democratic Party and other religious parties. (Even now some civic officials who have religious objections to gay marriage refuse to marry same-sex couples.) The two biggest issues would be very familiar to people in the U.S.: whether there should be a separate status for same-sex couples and how to deal with children — whether adoption rights would be included and what the status of children born into same-sex couples would be. That’s why the Netherlands ended up with two legal statuses for both same-sex and different-sex couples. And married same-sex couples still don’t have the same parental rights as different-sex married couples. Same-sex married couples can’t adopt children internationally, and a non-biological lesbian parent only gets “parental authority” for a child born to her female spouse, not automatic parental rights. To get full parental rights, the non-biological parent must still formally adopt the child.

Q: Did marriage change the individuals who entered into it? If so, how?

A: On a personal level, many people said that getting married made them feel more committed to or responsible for their partners, or that they felt some larger emotional or spiritual effects, even though most of these couples had already been together for many years before they could marry. Many same-sex couples were surprised to find that marriage changes how other people see them. Marriage triggers expectations of friends and family members, who support married couples and remind them that they’re part of a larger social institution.

Q: How did people who did not marry feel about having the right to marry?

A: The right to marry even changed people who chose not to marry. Everyone I interviewed noted that they were glad the law had changed — they felt “invited to the party” in the words of one person — and they said that they felt more a part of society as a result. The long-standing anger and resignation that many lesbians and gay men felt as the result of being excluded from such an important institution as marriage is not healthy, psychologically or physically. I believe that the sense of increased social inclusion that I saw in the Netherlands has the potential to profoundly change all lesbian, gay, and bisexual people in positive ways in the U.S., too.

Q: Did the legalization of same-sex marriage somehow change marriage in the Netherlands?

A: I looked hard for evidence of changes in the cultural idea of marriage and for evidence that heterosexuals and gay and lesbian couples have different ideas and behavior related to marriage — but I couldn’t find any. The trends in marriage and divorce didn’t change. The ideas about marriage expressed by lesbian and gay couples lined up with the ideas of their heterosexual peers: marriage is about the love and commitment of two people who work together as equals to weather life’s ups and downs, become members of each other’s extended families, and often (but not always) raise children together. Couples who formalize their relationships — gay or straight — are more likely to choose marriage than a civil union.

[Toasterlad]

21. They're Fine With Civil Unions For GAYS. Not For Themselves.

And that's only in those states that haven't already outlawed both same-sex marriage AND civil unions.

Your argument is ludicrous and counter-productive.

[mitchtv]

22. I don't know those kinds of people

besides they are liars. They fight Civil unions with the same ferocity ,( case in point WA) with the same lies that they fight marriage; they are bigots and liars.They are NOT OK with changing anything about marriage. Your're kidding youself

[Roosesvelte]

23. My Experience Has Convinced Me This Is A Valid Approach

But more to the point, we know 31 times out of 31 we've lost. So why not try a new approach the 32nd time?

[mitchtv]

24. My civil rights are not

to be voted on!>Look, I'll take what I can get, but the road you suggest is a dead end

[Roosesvelte]

27. I Am Curious What You Mean By A Dead End

Is it that you don't think it would succeed? And if so, why? I know the bigots won't support it. I strongly believe the middle will. Do you think we lose support from our own, or that that the middle is being disingenuous?

[ThomCat]

25. Wrong, and wrong.

The straight people who reject gay marriage are NOT going to give up their straight marriages for civil unions.

And this is not a self-inflicted wound. Homophobes created this situation, keep inflaming it, and are entirely 100% responsible for it.

To thing that LGBT people are responsible for "self-inflicting" our inability to get married is incredibly insulting. You are blaming us for the bigotry against us.

:grr:

[Roosesvelte]

26. I Do Not Blame Victims For Bigotry

The bigotry comes from bigots. I don't blame the oppressed for being persecuted either, I blame the oppressors. However there are successful ways to wage a fight, and unsuccessful one. There are strategies that work, and those that don't. Continuing the same strategy when it costs time and money at the expense of a different approach is something I think all vested parties should question. In no way does advocating a different approach justify the actions of the opposition.

[TheWraith]

9. Crap, I thought the title was referring to New York.

God our legislature sucks.